The regional chambers of England were a group of indirectly elected regional bodies that were created by the provisions of the Regional Development Agencies Act 1998.[1] There were eight regional chambers, one for each of the regions of England except Greater London, which had opted for an elected mayor and assembly in 1998. All eight regional chambers had adopted the title "regional assembly" or "assembly" as part of their name, though this was not an official status in law. The chambers were abolished over a two-year period between 31 March 2008 and 31 March 2010 and some of their functions were assumed by newly established Local authority leaders' boards.

Their original defined role was to channel regional opinions to the business-led regional development agencies. Their role later included scrutinising their regional development agency; integrating policy development and enhancing partnership working at the regional level across the social, economic and environmental policy agenda; as well as carrying out a wide range of advocacy and consultancy roles with UK government bodies and the European Union; but their public profile was low. Each acted as a Regional Planning Body with a duty to formulate a Regional Spatial Strategy including Regional Transport Strategy, replacing the planning function of county councils.

The eight regional chambers as defined by the Regional Development Agencies Act 1998 were not directly elected. About two-thirds of assembly members were appointees from the county and district councils and unitary authorities in each region, the remaining one-third were appointees from other regional interest groups.

The London Assembly was established as a directly elected body by separate legislation and is part of the Greater London Authority. It continues to exist after the abolition of the eight regional chambers.

In May 2002, the UK government published a White Paper, Your Region, Your Choice, outlining its plans for the possible establishment of Elected Regional Assemblies. These assemblies were to be responsible for regional strategies dealing with sustainable development, economic development, spatial planning, transport, waste, housing, culture (including tourism) and biodiversity. They would be funded primarily by central government grant, with powers to raise additional funds from a precept (demand for payment) on the council tax.

On 12 February 2004, Local Government Minister Nick Raynsford announced that elected Assemblies would be able to direct local authorities to refuse strategic planning applications that are not in the region's best interest. They would be able to look across local boundary constraints and ensure planning decisions are made with region-wide interests taken into account. On 8 July 2004 it was announced that the referendums would be held on 4 November, but on 2 July Raynsford announced that only the North East England vote would go ahead on that date. This region was chosen because the government thought it was the most likely to approve the proposal. However the voters rejected the assembly by 696,519 votes to 197,310. This overwhelmingly negative vote was seen as an insurmountable obstacle to elected regional assemblies elsewhere in England outside London. On 8 November, Deputy Prime MinisterJohn Prescott told the House of Commons he would not move orders for the other two regions within the effective time limit of June 2005 permitted by the Act.

The no vote by the North East also affected the Labour Government's attempt to address the West Lothian question, because the government had canvassed regional assemblies as a partial solution to this Question.[2]

The English Regions Network (ERN) is the umbrella organisation for England's eight partnership Regional Assemblies. While the London Assembly works with ERN on some issues it is not a full member of the Network.

On 17 July 2007 the UK government published the Review of Sub-National Economic Development and Regeneration.[5] The review brought forward the Government's plans to alter the structure of regional governance in England known as the Single Regional Strategy. The impact of the review was that the regional assemblies in their current form and function would not continue and that the regional development agencies were given executive responsibility for developing the single regional strategy.[6]

The regional chambers were abolished between 2008 and 2010 with their executive functions transferring to the regional development agencies. Local authorities were given an increased role in scrutiny at the regional level including scrutiny of regional strategies and the RDAs through participation in new local authority leaders' boards which were established in each region. The two bodies would jointly produce new single regional strategies, with Ministers exercising an oversight function.[7]

Following the abolition of the regional chambers, smaller Local Authority Leaders' Boards took over responsibilities for scrutiny of RDAs and Single Regional Plans.[8]

The first local authority leaders' board, 4NW, was established in July 2008 and others were formed once the regional chamber for that region was abolished. By April 2010, eight leaders' boards had been established.

In June 2010, the new Conservative-Liberal Democratcoalition government announced plans to remove funding from the new boards and to remove their statutory functions. The boards may continue as voluntary associations of council leaders.[9] regional development agencies were abolished on 31 March 2012, with their functions being taken over by smaller local enterprise partnerships which are not based on regional boundaries.

In July 2004, five Merseyside MPs, lead by George Howarth MP, launched a Manifesto for Merseyside which proposed a Merseyside Assembly, which would take a form similar to the existing London Assembly. As well as the five Merseyside boroughs, the proposals also included the Cheshire authorities of Halton and Ellesmere Port / Neston. The main argument was that the North West was too large and did not represent a cultural or economic area; something Merseyside did better.[13][14]

Since the General Election in May 2005, the concept of city regions has gained currency in academic, policy and government circles, with several think tanks pushing the idea as a viable alternative to elected regional assemblies.[citation needed] However, opinion is divided on the question of whether to impose new city regional structures from above or to allow existing elected bodies to come together on a more informal voluntary basis.[citation needed]